Susan,
Notice that this comment you responded to was sent through the
anonymous service via penet in Finland. Quite often people who use
this service are just trying to stir things up to no good purpose.
If they really believed what they said and were interested in a
real discussion of the subject the would not have to hide behind this
service.
Kelley
smorelan at magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (susan moreland) writes:
>In article <48kso1$epf at news.infi.net> an417702 at anon.penet.fi (Cool) writes:
>>In article <48h8n5$2c5 at hollywood.cinenet.net>, erc at cinenet.net (Eric Smith) says:
>>>>>>>>>What are otoacoustic emissions tests for?
>>>>>Selling more useless equipment to gullible audiologists.
>>I suspect, however, that the video-otoscope has eclipsed OAE
>>sales, at least for the past year.
>>"what fools these mortals be...."
>>Cool
>my, my... are we having a bad day?
>i have used OAE's to substantiate the claims of veterans who were requesting
>compensation based on claims of tinnitus. while the results would not enable
>to me say "yes, s/he definitely has tinnitus", i was at least able to say that
>the OAE results were or were not commensurate with the patient's case history
>and primary complaint.
>i wouldn't say that they are completely "useless".
>susan
--
Kelley Mascher (206) 528-2713
Children's Hospital & Med. Center mascher at u.washington.edu
Audiology Research